Prime Minister goes to Italy.

Our Prime Minster, Theresa May has been speaking in Florence today. It was good to see the 3 best mates, Boris, Philip Hammond and David Davis smiling happily in the front row seats. I liked the speech. It was very much as I expected. Much the most encouraging aspect is that the UK media had totally failed to line up interviewees of any significance to declare it was "disappointing" and "unrealistic". Not even the BBC. Most negative line was that not much would change for 5 years. My response to that is "So what". They had to fall back on Nigel Farage, and we all know that nothing would have satisfied him. He had prepared his negative lines before he heard the speech!
There will be differing responses, including within the Conservative Party. Already had one constituent on the phone upset that we are not just walking away with no deal. Personally, I welcome today's speech. Very much in line with my own opinions. The UK will leave the EU end of March 2019 - a timetable driven by the Lisbon Treaty. That does not leave enough time to work through a trade deal which is best for both sides. It seems there will be a period of about two years after March 2019 to negotiate a sensible trade deal which benefits EU and UK. Again personally, my response is "So what". We need best possible deal, and 'so what' if it takes until 2021. We do need the deal to be done before General Election in 2022 though.
What finance transfers there will be from UK to EU is another big issue. Personally, I've always accepted the the UK will pay what we owe, both legally and morally. In fact the figures being talked about today are far lower than that we had been led to expect. I suspect the EU negotiators will want more. But what's important to the negotiations is that it's interpreted as 'sufficient progress' to move on to discussions on trade.
Two other comments I want to make. Will be looking at commentators opinions. Is the reassurance given to EU legally migrants in the UK in the UK acceptable. And how will the commentators react to Mrs May herself. My view is that she is a good Prime Minister. Today I thought she really looked the part. I sense that she has poked in the eye those who have been most relentless in their criticisms.

Complexities of 'end of life' care

BBC is reporting today on an important legal case where Mr Justice Jackson has ruled that where relatives and clinicians treating patients in a permanent vegetative state agree that care can be ended, there should be no need for a judge to agree as well. Until now, all treatment, except withdrawal of food and fluid can be ended without a judge's involvement. A judge's involvement means incurring  great unnecessary expense. However, the implications of this judgement are such that the Official Solicitor may well appeal in the interests of clarifying the law.
This is a sensitive and difficult policy area, morally, legally and from the perspective of patient safety. A few years ago, I made public comment disagreeing with a judge who had ruled that a patient suffering from anorexia, with only a minuscule chance of living should be force fed. The case attracted a lot of publicity, as did my comment, which I had intended only to stimulate discussion. It was a policy area of interest to me, being opposed to the legalisation of assisted suicide - itself not a straightforward issue. The Justice Jackson case is not the same, but raises equally difficult questions in the field of end of life.
In this case, and at this stage, I rather agree with the judge. But I do feel the need to discuss it with others before coming to a final conclusion. Relatives and clinicians can already take actions such as withdrawing Dialysis, which results in death, without the involvement of a judge. I cannot see why this principle cannot be extended withdrawal of food and fluids. The only issue of concern to me is that it only applies in cases where the patient is in a permanent vegetative state and has miniscule chance of recovery.

Scotland and Wales First Ministers in tandem

 Wales First Minister, Carwyn Jones and Scotland First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon seemed to getting along very well in all today's TV clips. They might have disagreed over the Scottish Independence Referendum but they do give the impression of being as one in wanting to stop Brexit happening in March 2019 - or at all! know that Carwyn Jones says that he accepts the EU Referendum result but it doesn't sound much like it to me. Whatever, the Carwyn/Nicola show was in full cry today. I'm not sure how much of it is bluster for public consumption and how much is for real.
It seems that the Wales First Minister is planning to put forward 38 amendments to the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill. I suppose he would have to persuade MPs or members of the Lords to do this for him. And if these amendments are not agreed to, Carwyn Jones informs us will ask Assembly Members to refuse to agree to the Bill. Must admit I don't know precisely what power he has to deliver on this - or whether the Assembly Members can actually stop the Bill making progress. Maybe it's no more than an attempt to put pressure on the Westminster Gov't to agree to his demands. The reason I decided to write this blog post was because I need some clarity on the constitutional position here. If a constitutional lawyer happens upon this comment, any clarity would be welcomed. So treat this as 'work in progress'.
According to the BBC, the First Minister has four aims.
1) Ensure devolved policy areas come back to the Welsh Assembly and Scottish Parliament after Brexit.
2) Prevent UK Minsters unilaterally changing the Gov't of Wales Act and the Scotland Act.
3) Require the agreement of the Welsh Gov't on necessary changes to EU Gov't law in devolved areas after Brexit.
4) Ensure additional restrictions are not placed on devolved ministers compared with UK Gov't ministers.
I expect there to be much discussion between the UK Gov't and devolved Gov'ts over these 'conditions' as there will be over how we develop 'statutory frameworks' to protect the UK internal market and work through the powers being transferred temporarily into a 'Holding Pattern'.
I repeat, treat this blog post as 'work in progress'!

20 yrs ago today, the voters of Wales decided.

On 18th September 1997, the voters of Wales decided that a National Assembly for Wales should be established. Well, around 25% of them did. But as someone once surely said "one is a majority". And 6,000 votes is a lot more than one. Even if it wasn't a thumping 52%/48% victory. A majority of 0.6% ignored my advice that they should reject this expensive extra layer of bureaucracy. I was the only No person at the count in Llandrindod Wells in the early hours of Sept 19th when the last result came in from Carmarthen giving the Yes campaigners victory. I was surrounded by dancing, singing, whooping and tears of joy. I could see immediately that there was not to be any going back. Case of "if you can't beat them, join them"! Not quite perhaps, but I did accept the result immediately, and have worked to make a success of it ever since.
I stood for election to the National Assembly at its first election in 1999. I was defeated in Montgomeryshire by the all conquering Liberal Democrats in the form of Mick Bates. But I was elected as a 'regional' Assembly Member' for Mid and West Wales. Same thing happened 4 yrs later in 2003. But by 2007, the Labour machine banned 'duel candidacy' and I had to choose which hill to climb. Since I'd represented Mid and West Wales for 8 yrs I went for the 'list seat' and my political career bit the dust because my Conservative Party did too well. I was sad about that. That sort of thing happens with PR systems.
Anyway, in 2010, I rose from my political grave to be elected MP for Montgomeryshire, vanquishing the colourful Lembit Opik, and repeated the performance with increasing majorities in 2015 and 2017. Earlier this year I was very pleased to be a part of the Wales Office team that took the most recent Wales Act through to the statute book. I was especially pleased that responsibility for raising income tax and that the 'conferred powers' model of devolution has been replaced by the 'reserved powers model.
Its my desire to see devolution be a success, I do not think it has been yet. Services have not improved. If anything the reverse has been the case. And disappointingly, the politics of the National Assembly has not changed as I would have expected. Labour has formed the Government since day one, supported for part of that time by Plaid Cymru, the Lib Dems and by Lord Elis Thomas. No fault on Labour for this. It's a matter for the opposition parties. Unfortunately, the Welsh Conservatives have not persuaded others (notably Plaid Cymru) to lie in bed beside them. Maybe someday. When Labour are in opposition, the Welsh Parliament will have 'grown up'. Hope we don't have to wait 20 years for that!

What did Boris mean by that!

Personally, I'm reckon a bit of disagreement within political parties can be positive and creative. It can lead to  better decision making in that it can expose an unwise step to closer scrutiny. I know that political party's whipping operations like to keep everything under tight control, but Farage/UKIP, Corbyn/Labour and Trump/Republican have shown us that in today's turbulent politics, where social media and fake news are so influential, dominating the agenda is what matters - within reason anyway.
Anyway Boris Johnson wrote a 4,000 word article for the Daily Telegraph yesterday which doesn't seem to fit into anyone's media planning. It's generated a lot of interest, despite being totally loyal to the Prime Minister, and not actually saying anything he's not said before. As always with Boris, his writing is flamboyant, and his arguments well constructed. And it will connect. The aspect that interests me is what he says about the claim made by the Leave side leading up to the EU Referendum that leaving the EU would allow a future UK Govt to invest another £350million per week in the NHS.
I don't think anyone can give us precise figures, but this 'promise' made in early 2016, would have meant an extra £18bn per year added to the NHS budget. I should add that though I voted Leave, I did not use this figure at all. It seems to me that we could spend £18bn per year when we stop paying in (prob 2022). Though Boris thinks it could be earlier. The Govt has already increased the NHS budget by £8bn per year since the EU Referendum,  and I'd be surprised if the NHS budget was not increased again in the November budget.
Boris is a brilliant wordsmith. His article or 'essay' is readable and conveys a joyously optimistic
vision of a UK outside the EU. It is in no way disloyal to the Prime Minister and it says nothing that he hasn't said before. It was a very good read. I'm looking forward to a similarly good read on Friday when the Prime Minister makes a key Brexit speech in Florence. After a few months when not much seems to have been happening on the Brexit front, it does look as if things are starting to take shape. It's very interesting times we live in.

Renewable Energy from Offshore Wind.

I have always supported sourcing more of our energy from offshore wind. Offshore wind farms don't trash beautiful landscapes as onshore wind farms do. I thought the costs involved would fall over time. But I did not expect the rate at which the costs would fall to deliver the cfd (Contracts for Difference) prices announced yesterday. They were a real game changer. Worth looking at in detail.
The current market price of energy is around £53.50 per MWh (megawatt hour). Just 2yrs ago, offshore developers needed a guaranteed £117.14 per MWh to build offshore wind farms. Yesterday massive new projects in the North Sea were agreed at just £57.50 per MWh. Truly astonishing. And it's expected that prices will fall further. We expect battery technology to deliver more efficiency and lower costs, through reducing the negative impact of inconsistent generation. Development of non time-critical electricity users (electric cars) will also reduce costs.
Important to understand that no Government subsidy is involved. It's users of electricity that pay to guarantee the price. Yesterday's cfd auction prices are great news for electricity buyers into the furure.
 I have no doubt that onshore wind farm generation will be lower than the current £52.50 per MWh price. And I've no doubt that some onshore development will happen, especially in Scotland, where opposition to trashing the landscape is less than elsewhere. Certainly a lot less than in Mid Wales. I did my utmost to stop the appalling Mid Wales Connection Project from going ahead - and will continue as long as I have breath in my body. The implications of this delelopment in Mid Wales are horrendous. Like pouring a bucket of tar on a painting by Sir Kyffin Williams. It would be utter madness when cost of offshore wind is dropping like a stone.

Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon. Where now?

I have always supported the idea of using tidal power to generate energy. Since it was first proposed, I have supported the idea of the Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon. I'd love to see us run with this scheme - if it's viable. Now that's a very big 'if'. Despite supporting the idea, I've never felt able to completely commit to it. I've been surprised by how many are calling for the Govt to run with this scheme, no matter what the cost. Worryingly, most of the narrative around the project has involved criticism of the Govt for not agreeing to quarentee to buy the power produced by the SB Tidal Lagoon at the same price it will pay for that produced by nuclear power plants, but for nearly three times as long - which makes it much much more expensive. I know that the Hendry Report, commissioned by the Govt backed the scheme. Didn't expect anything else from Charles Hendry from the moment he was given the task of assessing it. The responsible Secretary of State, Greg Clarke is taking his time assessing the project. Quite right too. He's a very good Minister.  My guess is that the advice he is receiving from independent assessors is not flashing up 'Green'. So we will have to wait and see.

There is nothing at all new in this post so far. But the comments coming from Dale Vince, the founder and still owner (I think) of Ecotricity in a letter to Greg Clarke, reported on the BBC today is very significant. Dale Vince knows what he's talking about. Despite being hugely supportive of renewable energy, including tidal power, be believes that a lagoon not attached to the land will create energy at around a quarter of the price. And be more environmentally friendly. If it had been someone else saying this, it would just be an opinion, alongside other opinions. But it's the opinion of a man who knows. The Welsh Affairs Select Committee has just decided to take evidence and prepare a report on tidal lagoons. I do hope Dale Vince is invited to share his thoughts with us as part of that.

Notes from Gibraltar

I write this column for the Oswestry and Borders Chronicle as sitting out on my balcony overlooking the Bay of Gibraltar. The Spanish port of Algeciras is to my right. The Mountains of North Morocco are to my left. The Straits of Gibraltar, opening onto the Atlantic (next stop the US) are in front of me. 100,000 seagoing vessels of various sorts pass through this way every year, a high proportion taking on fuel and stores at Gibraltar, or undergoing various sorts of repair and maintenance. 

Algeciras and Gibraltar are hugely important to Spain and Britain respectively - for very different reasons. Algeciras is one of the world’s busiest commercial ports and of great importance to the Spanish economy. Gibraltar is crucial to the defence of Britain, and through this defence capability, crucially important to maintaining peace in the world. 

I am in Gibraltar for 3 days as a guest on the Gibraltarian Government, who want us to understand the importance of the Port of Gibraltar to the world. Yesterday we spent three hours aboard HMS Diamond, one of Britain's six Type 45 anti-missile destroyers, which each cost a billion pounds and are deployed all over the world in support of the British interest. They are seriously impressive bit of military kit. 

The timing of our visit coincides with the celebration of National Day, held annually on September 10th. This year is special because it's the 25th such National Day. The tradition was started by the great socialist Chief Minister, Joe Bassano, whom I feel I know quite well now. I have been to help celebrate Gibraltar's National Day before, and know it to be a wonderful occasion - a glorious celebration of the spirit of Gibraltar. It's also a statement of an enduring love for Britain. My first visit to Gib was in July 1969. There was a General Election taking place, won by the Intergration with Britain Party. Too years before there had been a referendum to decide whether Gibraltar should stay British or return to Spanish control. Spain had long claimed 'ownership' of Gibraltar. 12,138 votes for Britain and 44 voted for Spain. That settled the issue. And that is how it’s going to stay.

A key part of the Gibraltarian economy is based on financial services and online betting. So unsurprisingly, Gibraltarians were concerned about the possible impact of the United Kingdom's decision to leave the European Union. 96% voted Remain. So I did not expect to hear the speech of the inspirational Chief Minister, Fabian Picardo over lunch, which was stunningly positive about Brexit. He said, bluntly, that they had "got it wrong". In the last year, GDP increased by an astonishing 9%. Average salaries rose to £90,000. Unemployment fell to just 74 people. Truly remarkable figures. The key to Gibraltar's economic future is its close links with Britain. 90% of exports are to Britain, and our two Governments are working together positively on Brexit. All the opposite of what was feared. No wonder National Day celebrations have been more joyous than ever this last week.

European Union (Withdrawal) Bill.

For last two days of Parliamentary business, MPs have been debating the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill. Over 100 MPs spoke in the debate. Listened in on much of it. Must admit I found much of it quite repetitive. Lots of very good speeches but after the early opening speeches, there was not much more to be said. I shared my thoughts on the issue with Radio Wales listeners on Good Evening Wales tonight at 6.00. In reality there is not as much difference in view across the Commons, as is often portrayed, apart from those who simply do not accept the people's vote to leave on June 23rd 2016. Most MPs accept that the UK is going to leave the EU, even if there is disagreement about how it's to happen and what sort of transition is going to be arranged.

Today's debate was about the practicalities of how we are going to leave. What the Bill proposes is that all EU law is transposed into British Law when we leave, giving maximum legal certainty and continuity to the UK on 'Brexit Day'. It repeals the European Communities Act 1972. It ensures that, wherever possible, the same rules and laws apply the day before and day after we leave. And it gives ministers in this Parliament the power to make statutory instruments to deal with the transition. This procedure is often referred to as Henry V111 powers. It's based on Ol Henry passed legislation to do pretty well whatever he wanted. This element of the Bill has been the major 'bone of contention' in the debate, and is being interpreted as a 'power grab'. Personally I do think this is a wild exaggeration - made mostly by those who still hope that we reverse the referendum position.

As a general principle, I do think Henry V111 powers are only acceptable if there is not any other reasonable way to proceed. A Government's capacity to proceed without parliamentary approval is the final resort. And that is what will happen in practise. We will be voting on this Bill in the next hour, and I expect it to be approved comfortably. But that should not be taken as total approval. The Government has said it is in 'listening mode' and I expect amendments to be accepted at Committee stage, with some moved by Conservative MPs, even the Government itself. Securing the passage of the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill through The House of Commons is going to be (and should be) hotly debated. And then it will be  on to the House of Lords where the temperature will rise even higher.

Immigration is good, but not too much.

Because of the bank holiday weekend, I had to write my Oswestry and Border Chronicle article last Friday. It was published today. I wrote it on the back of last week's net immigration figures, which reported a significant fall. Anyway, it's a controversial subject which excites opinion. Here it is;

"The level of immigration is a very important issue for the British people. It was probably the most significant factor in their decision that the UK should leave the European Union in last year's EU Referendum. They wanted the UK Government to have direct control over immigration, and thought the current level  to be unsustainably high. Personally, I did not share the widespread concern, but did think a net increase in UK population of over 300,000 every year was too high, and if continued over decades would lead to social problems. This is why this week's  figures, showing a large reduction in net immigration are to be welcomed.

As always, much of the discussion about this change misses the reality behind what's happening. So easy (and inaccurate) to attribute the fall in numbers to EU citizens returning home simply because they feel less welcome in the UK since the referendum vote. The reality is much more complex. Firstly, the economies of countries from where EU immigration has been greatest are becoming more economically successful. Many of those who saw opportunity for work and supporting their families by moving temporarily to the UK can increasingly see good opportunities at home. And secondly, the fall in the value of Sterling has significantly reduced the value of money returned to Eastern European countries from the UK.

As the UK leaves the EU, the debate about immigration will change. As the level of EU net immigration falls, some UK business sectors will have recruitment difficulties. The most obvious example is in the harvesting of seasonal fruit and vegetable crops. There could also be problems in the social care and hospitality industries, where immigration from the EU has delivered much needed employees. To avoid damaging disruption, we must try to ensure change is gradual and manageable.

Again personally, I've never thought that immigration from Europe will be a long term problem. But immigration from the rest of the world will be. The mass movement of people from areas of conflict in the world, and from areas of drought, will increase hugely. Again, a manageable level of immigration is generally good, boosting economic growth and cultural understanding across the world. What those who voted 'Leave' last year wanted was to be in control of the change that has always been a feature of life in Britain. 

'Thoughts on Brexit'

What is one to think of the current Brexit discussion. Personally, I really don't know, except that it's much more promising than I thought it would be when I voted 'Leave' a year last June. Like many others, I found casting my referendum vote a strange experience - a strange mixture of certainty and uncertainty. Even though not keen on the holding of an In-Out referendum, I was always certain I would vote 'Leave' but deeply uncertain about how the process of leaving would go. Reason I was not keen on a referendum was that I thought it near impossible to make a considered judgement. So had to vote, at least in part, by instinct.
Now it would be very easy to think that negotiations are not going well. Most of main commentators were in favour of remain, and don't accept the referendum 'decision' - while telling us that they do! The BBC in particular cannot believe the people did not do what they assumed they would do. Every story, however small and insignificant is portrayed as having a negative impact. Any remotely positive item usually begins "Despite Brexit......". It's also the case that the Government leading up to the referendum seems to have done zilch preparation for a Leave vote. Left a bit of 'catching up' to do.
The main reason I write blogs is to help me rationalise my thoughts. And this post is no more than 'introductory' and general. Plus it's a response to attitudes of people I know who are utterly appalled by the prospect of the UK leaving the EU. One good friend of mine tells me that if he were younger, he would leave Britain (to live where I did not ask). Must admit I was astonished. But I do accept that divisions run deep on this issue. The only remainder comment that causes me marginal irritation (and I'm not one to be irritated by opinion) is "I voted remain for the sake of our children". Unfortunately what I hear is what's meant but not spoken "You voted Leave because you're too selfish to consider your children". In fact I voted Leave for my children and grandchildren. I want them to live in a free, independent country run as a democracy, and not as a unresponsive bureaucracy run by a faceless machine which tramples underfoot any independent nation that has its own ideas. Poor Greece. It's why the whole thing will eventually collapse.
It's taken a while for the UK Govt to get up to speed with the negotiations. But I do think we're getting there now. We are publishing interesting discussion papers. The EU machine is just sitting there (on what their negotiators see as the high ground) insisting that the UK does what we are told, in the order they dictate. It's an attitude that's made me more certain than ever that I voted the right way. Anyway, that'll do for background intro. Will read it tomorrow, and probably change bits of it. And perhaps write another post about today's total re-setting of Labour Party policy. Firstly will have to decide whether it's much of a change at all, or just political posturing.

Syrian Refugees settling down in Montgomeryshire.

Powys County Council arranged a tea party at the Royal Welsh Agricultural Showground today for Syrian Refugees being resettled in Wales. I thought it was a brilliant idea so decided to go along to add my support to the message welcoming these refugees to Montgomeryshire. All six families who have been resettled in Newtown were there. Really pleased that I went along. It was great to see Syrian refugees, who have suffered so much, clearly enjoying themselves in Mid Wales.

The UK response the the human catastrophe arising out of conflict in Syria has caused me some stress. Unusually for me, I feel I've been subject to quite a lot of unjustified abuse - quite serious abuse. I should go through it chronologically.

When the Syrian President, Bashar al-Assad first began his murderous assault on his own people, driving millions into refugee status, I took the view (publicly) that the UK should do everything reasonable to help. I thought we should set an example by taking in 30,000 Syrian refugees. The UK response was indeed generous, in terms of humanitarian aid - I think pro-rata more than any other country. But we did not take in as many as I hoped we would. I thought we could have set a good example. I have always believed the utterly shocking conditions facing displaced people (maybe 10 million of them) demanded a total focus by the UK on doing all we could to help. I was impressed and influenced by the work of Conservative, Andrew Mitchell and Labour's Clare Short is increasing knowledge of the reality to MPs at Westminster.

But despite being committed to helping refugees, I have received much criticism (and worse) from those who felt we should divert UK attention and resource to bringing into the UK, children from refugee centres in France. I fully accept that there was a humanitarian case to bring in Sangatte children, but it was not nearly as desperate as those trapped in refugee camps and besieged towns in Syria and on the Syrian borders, where innocents were being gassed, starved to death, raped and murdered. France is a modern civilised county, perfectly capable of dealing with the issue, and in any case, the French Govt did not want the UK to add to the 'pull' factor bringing refugees to France in the first place.

The refugee problem has not gone away. Over last two/three years the most catastrophic refugee movements have been from North Africa, through Libya. But what we are reading now is that the flow of refugees from Libya, many just sailing out in unseaworthy boats to their deaths, has been reduced. We are now told refugees are starting to cross from N Africa to Spain.

Back to today. We have a responsibility to help the refugees we have allowed in legally to settle in, and integrate into our society. That's what was happening in Builth Wells today. Congratulations to Powys County Council for taking the responsibility seriously.

Political Questions laced with hot sun and Prosecco

Had Wales' foremost political journalist, David Williamson on the phone today asking about some of the  prosecco fuelled comments currently circulating about the state of the Conservative Party at present. First up was this new party that's going to be formed with the support of disaffected MPs from established parties. Next question was whether I think Jacob Rees-Mogg will be next Leader of the Conservative Party (and Prime Minister). Then there was whether I thought the UK would remain in the Single Market and Customs Union after leaving the EU. And then it was whether Donald Trump was interested in stepping down as the US Presidency to become a 'peace envoy' to North Korea.

Actually, I made up that last one, even if it is more likely than a new party be formed, named 'The Democrats' or whatever. It seems some un-named Cabinet members and ex-Cabinet members have been going around saying they are ready to jump into bed with a Mark Chapman to form a modern day SNP. I had not heard of Mr Chapman before. Personally I would rather believe Mrs Brown than an un-named 'source'. While over the last year or two, anything seems possible in the political world, I responded with "not a snowflake's chance in a sauna".

And then there's Jacob, who is an outstanding MP. He has a forensic mind, a special talent with words, and a thought process based on principle. And I like him. But I don't see him as our next Prime Minister. Don't think he does either. At least that's what I thought he wrote in today's Telegraph. But the newspaper clearly think Jacob is the man. Today's front page headline informs us that Jacob favours cutting Stamp Duty on houses. The reality is that you would find it difficult to find a Conservative who doesn't think that. And anyway, we have a very good Prime Minister already.

Then it was the inevitable search for Tory splits. Time to dust off the old debate about leaving the Single Market and Customs Union in 2019. Personally, I take the Hammond position. We will be leaving the European Union, leaving the Single Market and leaving the Customs Union. Full stop. Now I don't mind if there is a transition/implementation period, or how long it is (within reason). I just want the best deal for the UK and for the EU. And I'm fairly sure that everything I said is so predictable that it won't make it into the paper!!

Shropshire Hospitals Reform Update

This post is a follow on from my post of 4 days ago about reform of NHS Hospital Care to serve Shropshire and Mid Wales, a subject of some interest to me over last 40 years. And great interest over  the last 20yrs. Local health and social care partners met this week and accepted the recommendations put forward by the Future Fit Programme Board as I predicted last week. Essentially this is the same as recommended last December. It's been agreed that the additional 'assurance' work carried as a result of the delay has "not materially effect" the plans previously agreed.
REMINDER - services to be provided at the Princess Royal Hospital include Urgent Care (24/7), majority of day care surgery, planned orthopaedic surgery, outpatient care, diagnostics and a midwifery unit. Services to be provided at the Royal Shrewsbury Hospital include Emergency and Critical Care, Urgent Care (24/7), complex surgery, Outpatients, diagnostics and Women's and Children's Centre.
The papers presented to Monday's meeting, which my last post on this issue outlined were signed by the 'Accounting Officers' of both the Shropshire CCG and the Telford and Wrekin CCG. That's important.
The next step on this long and winding path is consideration of this recommendation, and agreement that it can go out to a 12 week public consultation. The CCGs (Clinical Commissioning Groups) Joint Committee meets next Thursday (10th August) to do that. I hope to be there. It was at this stage last December that things fell apart. The Joint Committee then split 6 for and 6 against. No mechanism for a casting vote. This time there will be 15 votes - 6 from the Shropshire CCG and 6 from the Telford and Wrekin CCG plus 3 Independents appointed by the Government. I'm told the Chair is to be Professor Simon Brake, a man of great experience. Two others 'independents' have also been appointed but since I've not seen their names in public, I don't think should tonight type their names into this blog post. Next Thursday will be a key meeting. If it goes as I hope it will, I'm looking forward to my future role pressurising the UK Government to put up the £200 million (rumoured to be) to cover the capital cost. Expect the next update on Friday 11th.

Changing Face of Newtown.

 I spent a significant proportion of my life involved in the transformation of Newtown from the depths of despair following the depopulation in the trentieth century into the modern thriving job-opportunity town it is today. For decades, a key part of this was the construction of a new by-pass. Finally it is happening and should be open next year, or soon thereafter. It's now time to consider seriously how to take full advantage of this massive Welsh Government investment in Mid Wales. Fundamental to this transformation is future development and management of green spaces around the town. A local group, involving the Town Council, Cwm Harri and others has put together a bid to manage the 115 acres involved. A key factor which underpins this plan involves an asset transfer from Powys County Council to the local management group Who presented their proposals to me this week. I have written a supportive letter to Cllr Phyl Davies, the new County Councillor who has taken on the responsibility. My letter follows;

"Following a constructive meeting with the bid team on Friday 28 July, where the whole scheme was outlined and details given of the potential £1.1 million investment in Newtown, I would like to offer my support to such a worthwhile project.

The importance of this potential inward investment into a Mid Wales town cannot be overestimated.  A transfer of land amounting to over 115 acres from Powys County Council ownership to be managed by a newly constituted group of key stakeholders and volunteers, can set an example of good practice to many local authorities in the future.  The fact that this group are looking to not only maintain the land in its present state but, with the help of the lottery funds, to enhance and develop the space, has nothing but positives to commend it. Such an investment will benefit not only the present townspeople but also future generations to come.

This imaginative approach to community asset transfer, with the intention of turning transfer of liability into transfer of asset, has much to recommend it, especially as it aims to galvanise community stakeholder support for self- management thereafter.

With the bypass now well on the way to completion, it is essential that Newtown has as many attractions as possible to encourage visitors into the town, which can only be of benefit to local businesses.  It is tremendous to see the stakeholders being proactive, looking for positive outcomes and hoping to make a difference to the lives of their fellow residents."

The Imminent Arrival of Electric Cars.

This week, Defra Secretary of State, Michael Gove informed us that all new cars powered by petrol and diesel will be banned by 2040 - just 23 yrs away. Whether or not this will turn out to be precisely the case is not the point. It establishes the direction, and target we are aiming for. Actually, all it does is tell us about the change that is already taking place. I have been genuinely surprised by the number of usually well informed people who have denounced the move away from conventionally powered cars as both unwise and unlikely to happen. To me this seems to be a case of  a 'Head in the sand' response. The reality is it's already happening - already accelerating away. And it's the reality that diesel and petrol cars are on the way out. This is being accepted by most of the motor industry.

It's not just the UK which sees an end to petrol and diesel cars. Two weeks ago, France made the same announcement. Norway is bringing in the change by 2025 - just 8 years away. In 2013, there were a few more than 3000 electric cars on our roads. Today it's over 100,000. Volvo has announced it will go all electric or hybrid by 2019. BMW has last week announced a new assembly line to build electric Minis in Oxford. New models are being launched every month. Every car manufacturer is bringing out new electric cars. We may well have reached the 'tipping point' already.

We know there are multiple challenges. The biggest is where will the electricity come from. Massive new supplies will be needed. At present we don't know where it will all come from. But la st week, Britain's first 'floating' offshore wind turbine was launched - much earlier than we expected. This combined with developing battery storage technology will transform generation from wind. Storage technology will also transform prospects for solar. Leaving the EU will allow the cost of importing solar panels to fall significantly. Nuclear power will also develop, hopefully through Small Modular Reactors. Perhaps other power sources like hydrogen will emerge over the next two decades. As well as energy sources we've not thought of yet. And of course there are nothing like enough charging points on long journeys. We know that, but an appropriate network will develop as demand grows. And the range of new electric cars is increasing rapidly. Lots of other problems too, but they will be faced and managed.

It's true that none of us knows how the electric car market will develop over the next 23 yrs. but it's going to happen - driven by air pollution legislation the in our cities and large towns. And leaving the EU won't stop this. King Canute was rolled over by the unstoppable tide. Our car manufacturers will not want to be rolled over by electric cars while they chase a falling market.

Intimidation of political candidates

The recent General Election was much the most unpleasant election I've ever been involved in. Initially I'd decided to say nothing about it. 'Heat of the kitchen' etc.. "Put it behind you Glyn, and move on". And "Don't let the bu***rs get you down". But it's not as simple as that. It's become a major issue of debate at Westminster. The widespread 'casual' aggression and intimidation of candidates has become a real concern across all political parties.

Of course unpleasantness at elections is nothing new - even in the gentle rural constituency of Montgomeryshire. Since I've been an MP, there have been knife attacks on fellow MPs and Jo Cox was murdered on the street just over a year ago. I'd had someone tell a friend of mine, outside my office the "the only way we'll get rid of him is to shoot the bas***d". He meant me! Actually, it wasn't the only way because he had a go at running me down in Morrison's car park a few days later!

But back to the General Election. A young lady was delivering my leaflets in a quiet Montgomeryshire village, when a big man came chasing after her, shouted at her nose-to-nose as spitting at her. An hour later she was still traumatised. Ended up as an apology in the police station. And I turned up at one of my public meetings to be confronted by a group of around 20, chanting "Tory Pig", "Tory Pig". I was alone. Shamefully, there were small children dragooned to join in. The young lady along with me to take notes, and already in the hall, has declared that she will never go there again. Fear. First time I've felt the need to check over my car before driving home. Shouldn't be like this anywhere. But in Montgomeryshire....

And there was the obscene daubing and destruction of my posters. And it was only my posters. No other party's posters.  Then there were the bare-faced lies and deceit plastered all over the Internet by keyboard warriors, full of their custard and cowardice. And fliers all over the place - many sjtill there. The problem is not one that bothers me, personally. I played in the back row for years, and was never the most gentle of souls. I can look after myself. But not everyone can. I'm told that research suggests lots of potential candidates don't feel they can cope with the aggression. They opt out.

What's to be done. I do think that MPs can help themselves by cutting out the vulgar shouting at Prime Minister's Questions - even if it is almost the only part of Parliamentary proceedings that a significant proportion of the public bother to watch. And there's the appalling QuestionTime on BBC, where guests are sometimes chosen on the basis of their reputations to be rude, and audience members the same. The TV election debates are in the same mould. All a dreadful example to young people. The ability to disagree without being offensive is disappearing. But for the real abuse there will have to be jail sentences - in my opinion. Democracy is important. It underpins the way we live, with respect for each other. This needs to be defended. Civilised society requires those who undermine it to hear the clang of a prison cell door behind them.

At Last. Movement on Shropshire NHS Reform.

Hoping to set aside some time to share my thoughts on this blog site again through summer recess.  Lots of subjects to write about but today will return to one that has featured several times in the past few years - reform of the NHS secondary care system which serves Shropshire and Mid Wales. Should begin with a recap.

For many years, we have realised that changing patterns of healthcare has meant larger populations are needed to sustain a District General Hospital. The population of Shropshire and Mid Wales can no longer sustain its two DGHs, one located at Shrewsbury and the other at Telford. While the best solution would be to build one new DGH to replace them, it's simply too expensive. So the preferred solution is to merge the two hospitals, one to focus on 'emergency' care, and the other on 'planned' care. The 2 CCGs (Clinical Commissioning Groups) serving Shropshire and Mid Wales established The Future Fit Programme Board to recommend a way forward. Over 3years later (and costing millions of pounds) it made its recommendations before Christmas. The CCGs met and split 6/6 on a motion to accept the recommendation, and go out to public consultation on it. Total chaos. Local politics trumped clinical care (in my opinion). Been much effort getting the show back on the road. At last we expect progress on Monday at an important meeting of the Future Fit Programme Board.

Local health and social care partners will meet on Monday at a 'closed' meeting to consider next steps  needed to transform hospital services for local patients in Shrewsbury, Telford and Wrekin and Mid Wales. The meeting will review the additional assurance work carried out, and decide whether the time is right for a public consultation on its recommendations. The 2 new reports are;
1) Additional analysis of potential changes to Women's and Children's services - taking in depth look at potential impact of changes to those services.
2) Independent review of the Future Fit Options Appraisal Process - looking at the assurance processes carried out so far.

Any recommendation made by the Future Fit Programme Board on Monday will be about whether the time is right to launch a full public consultation lasting 12 weeks. This recommendation would have to be approved by a joint committee of the Shropshire and Telford and Wrekin CCGs Board - with an independent Chair and key observers (hopefully to avoid the shambles we witnessed last December).

We are fast approaching a situation where the current NHS system serving Shropshire and Mid Wales breaks down. And there's no point shouting at SaTH (The Shrewsbury and Telford NHS Hospitals Trust). It's doing its best in difficult circumstances. The position is becoming desperate. We need agreement in order to ask Central Government for the reported £200 million needed for the capital works. Let's hope we see a decisive step forward taken on Monday.

Influencing Government Policy

Taken a break from writing my blog while I've been engaged in campaigning for the right to represent Montgomeryshire in the House of Commons for another five years (or however long the current Parliament lasts). Personally, I reckon it will last much longer than some seem to think. Anyway a friend of mine asked me tonight to start blogging again. So here goes with what I was just thinking about.
It was an unusual election, in that I've not before seen so much rubbish doing the rounds on the Internet. Generally it was stuff intended to cause me electoral damage. My policy is that it's best just to totally ignore it, letting the 'keyboard warriors' talk amongst themselves. Whatever, it doesn't seem to had much negative impact!

Now there's no point in trying to justify in the face of this stuff, unless there's a purpose - such as trying to explain how Westminster works. It can be a bit of a mystery. Anyway, this stemmed from a casual comment by me that I was, in general, quite devolutionary. The keyboard warriors went to town, listing all the occasions I've voted against devolving more powers to the Welsh Parliament. I also pointed out that because further devolution is not that popular, these accusatory posters, intended to damage me, were more like.y to have the opposite effect. But on to the point I want to make about process.
Over the last year or so, as PPS in the Wales Office, I've been involved in taking the Wales Bill through Parliament. In general the Wales Act, passed earlier this year devolves more powers to the Welsh Parliament. What happened (as always happens) is that other parties during the various Parliamentary stages put down amendments to amend, or strengthen the Bill. They don't expect these amendments to carry, usually just putting down markers or making points. Government accepts some of them, puts on some itself, while other amendments are withdrawn. A few are pushed to a division, where Government invariably votes them down. It how legislation is debated and developed. The Wales Bill, very unusually, became an Act without and amendment succeeding in either the Commons or the Lords.
But this process means there are many amendments I vote against, giving 'keyboard warriors' who have time on their hands to trawl the Internet, putting together 'evidence' that I am anti devolutionary. So happens, I usually have far more politically damaging criticism that I am too devolutionary - which is why in this instance the 'keyboard warriors' were inadvertently being helpful. I particularly enjoyed that! But this post is to explain one aspect of how a bill makes its way to the statute book.

Conservative Manifesto on Funding of Care for the Elderly.

There has been quite a bit of negative publicity about proposed changes to support of the elderly in the Conservative manifesto. Personally, I think it unjustified. But let's  consider it in more detail - starting with the background policy context. We have a Prime Minister who is committed to governing in the interests of everyone. I share her commitment. I also have a long standing personal interest to supporting the frail elderly, the number of whom is increasing very quickly indeed. We cannot carry on as we have been doing over recent decades. The system of care will collapse. The voice of the frail elderly is not being heard. The challenge is to create a care system that is both fair and sustainable. 

There are three changes in future policy written into our manifesto which affect the elderly. Let's consider them in turn. Firstly, we want to introduce a system of financing domiciliary care similar to the current rules on financing residential care - only fairer. For my constituents in Montgomeryshire, its important to note that no change is proposed in Wales, where social care is devolved to the Welsh Government. As the changes affect England, two crucial points are being ignored. Firstly care will be free to anyone worth £100,000 or less. And no matter what value assets anyone has, there will be a maximum total payment (suggested in recent years as likely to be about £70,000).

Secondly, it is proposed that what is known as the 'triple lock' on state pension increases is being replaced by 'a double lock'. The state pension will not automatically increase by 2.5% if inflation is lower. So while inflation is 2.5% or above, which it currently is, the change has no effect whatsoever because it will rise by inflation anyway. In future, there will be a 'double lock' which guarantees that the state pension will increase by inflation or increased level of earnings, whichever is the higher. The problem to be addressed was that following the long period of very low inflation, a degree of inter generational unfairness developed, creating unacceptable pressure on young families and support payments. The 'triple lock' has the potential to divert too much of the welfare budget into the state pension at the expense of everything else. Adopting a 'double lock' is a small change which will deliver more fairness in the long term.

The third change relates to the Winter Fuel Allowance, which will in future be means tested and will continue unchanged for those who need it. Over recent years I've received many emails calling for this change, usually from people who have given their allowance to charity because they felt they had no need of it.

I simply cannot agree that the Prime Minister is being unfair. She, and I are both focussed on fairness, creating a sustainable affordable system of welfare payments and a manifesto which is open and honest about future policy.